Recent literature reviews have concluded that a majority of studies show a positive relationship between physical activity (PA) and academic achievement (Biddle & Asare, 2011; Rasberry et al., 2011; Singh, Uijtdewilligen, Twisk, van Mechelen, & Chinapaw, 2012). However, studies are often presenting weak effect sizes, and there are warnings about a tendency to accentuate positive correlations, resulting in a possible bias in the literature (Howie & Pate, 2012). There is also the matter of distinguishing between different arenas of PA. Students can participate in PA within (physical education (PE), recess, classroom settings) and outside (general PA, organized sport, fitness related activities) the school context (CDC, 2010; Howie & Pate, 2012). According to Fox, Barr-Anderson, Neumark-Sztainer, & Wall (2010, p. 32), there is “uncertainty whether improved academic achievement among adolescents involved in sport teams relates to the general benefits of physical activity or to the specific benefits of participating on an athletic team”. Fox et al. (2010), goes on to tackle this problem by making a clear distinction between sport team participation and general PA. This would seem to be a sufficient distinction in countries where sport is organized within the school context. However, in Norway, organized sport is a voluntary organization leaving schools with a modest role to play (Bergsgard & Norberg, 2010; Ibsen & Seippel, 2010). Taking into account the separation of school and organized sport in Norway, the present study distinguish between three arenas of PA: a) organized sport, b) general PA, and c) school PA. The aim of this paper is to investigate what arena of PA has the most profound impact on academic achievement.
There are several diferent models of expalantion for the relationship between physical activity and academic achievement, including a) physiological factors (Singh et al., 2012), b) executive functioning (Best, 2010), c) the Zero-sum model (Coleman, 1961), d) the identification/commitment model (Marsh, 1993), and e) the effect of highly structured activities, including “regular participation schedules, rule-guided engagement, directed by one or more adult activity leaders, an emphasis on skill development that is continually increasing in complexity and challenge, activity performance that requires sustained active attention, and clear feedback on performance” (Mahoney & Stattin, 2000, pp. 114-115). Following Darling, Caldwell & Smith (2005), sport is considered one of several highly structured activities. Structured, extra curricular, activities seems to contribute to positive development of young persons in several different ways: 1) Physical and psychological safety, 2) Appropriate structure, 3) Supportive relationships, 4) Opportunities for belonging, 5) Positive social norms, 6) Support for efficacy and mattering, 7) Opportunity for skill building, 8) Integration of family, school, and community efforts (Mahoney, Eccles, & Larson, 2004, pp. 119-120).
Acknowledging several different explanations to how PA could impact academic achievement, we also need to keep in mind that there are other factors playing an important role. It is well documented that gender- and class differences are reproduced within the Norwegian school context. In general, girls achieve better than boys, particularly in Norwegian (Bakken, Borg, Hegna, & Backe-Hansen, 2008; Ekren, Aanerud, & Tuhus, 2014; Wiborg, Arnesen, Grøgaard, Støren, & Opheim, 2011). The notable exception is PE where boys receive better grades than girls (Steffensen & Ziade, 2009). It is also well documented that students who have parents with higher education achieve better grades compared to students who have parents without higher education (Andersen, 2009; Hægeland, Kirkebøen, Raaum, & Salvanes, 2013; Tuhus, 2013; Wiborg et al., 2011). In addition to different arenas of PA, this paper will control for other important factors documented to have an impact on academic achievement.
